An object is 'sensed', i.e. a perception occurs in mind: the notion of an object arises in mind, produced by stimulus and obtaining body from memory. Such is the genesis of a thought.
Then this impression is repeated again and again with incalculable rapidity until the impression assumes 'form' and is cognised as a 'table' or a 'star'. Each of these repetitions is a separate quanta, and the object is composed of these quanta, and so is built-up as a supposedly material unit. Such is the 'reality' of the object, and its dimensions, shape and distance are judged by these quanta, the quanta being attributed to the light by which the object is perceived, whereas they lie exclusively in the perceiving mind.*
All light being presumed quanta, all distance is presumed quanta, and all velocity, and all are only in the observing mind. All, therefore, depend upon succession, the sequence of time, which itself is nothing but seriality - the repetition of quanta.
It must follow that the most 'distant' star is neither further nor nearer than the nearest, for all these calculations are based on false premises and are purely imaginary - images in mind. Such is the world of form, the material universe that science observes and studies with such assiduity - and all is devoid of existence outside the scientist's own aspect of mind. In studying nature he is studying a space-time creation which is ultimately his own creation and so is himself.
I have presented the case as clearly as I could, and express no opinion concerning it. It would appear that the greater physicists - such as Einstein, Jeans, Eddington, Schrödinger, all arrived at some such conception, or left words from which it can be deduced. It is also congruous with the implications of some of the Sutras attributed to the Buddha.
Thus 'time' is mind's repetitive manifestation, and is composed entirely of these repetitions which constitute a succession of quanta. Such quanta have no independent existence as such, that is they are conceptual only, images, laboratory apparatus, and 'time' - their resulting concept - has no factual existence either, since both merely represent the sentient mind or supposed 'ego'.
The least satisfactory part of this thesis is the genesis of the original perception which to my understanding could only be a concept, i.e. a pre-concept.
*It was pointed out in Ch. 51 that since the velocity of light is unaffected by the motion of an observer, approaching its source or receding from it, light must manifest the further direction of measurement (dimension) from which the observer as such must be looking. This confirms, and is confirmed by, what is stated here regarding quanta.
